Elite private school for typical smart kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

This fool still thinks private education gives any advantage over public education. Taking out St. Albans and Sidwell, the college admissions are practically identical for public and private in the DMV.

First of all, if you actually read what I wrote, you’ll see I didn’t say that at all.

Second, it’s not all about college admissions. It’s about the quality of the education. For many kids—not all—the quality will be higher at an excellent private school. Even though they might end up at the same college as a kid from a great public school, they very well might have better skills going in. For me, college was an absolute breeze. I went to Georgetown SFS and can honestly say that I graduated magna cum laude without much challenge. High school was significantly more intellectually challenging. I didn’t experience a challenge again until I went to a UChicago PhD program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

They certainly taught delusion. Full pay at Andover/Exeter and you don't think you're wealth. You don't think there was value in admissions, but you were confident enough to only apply to two schools.

There’s full pay and then there’s old money wealth. That’s the difference OP and I are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

Both Phillips Academy at Andover and Phillips Exeter Academy were founded on egalitarian principles & mission. Other super elite NE boarding schools--such as St.Paul's School--were founded to educate the sons and daughters of the wealthy & powerful.

Regardless, I can’t overestimate the privilege at my high school. I went to school with kids whose families have buildings named for them at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are you people falling for an obvious and badly done troll?

I am not a troll. I have friends who seem to be outcasts or at least not included at St Albans. Their kids are unhooked so I wonder why all the effort of being not accepted at a school. College admissions don’t seem like it would even benefit their kid since all the hooked kids will take the coveted ivy spots. I think their kid could be equally happy at the local good public.

I’m probably just projecting my own rationale on keeping my kids in public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

We live in McLean where public schools are excellent. My kids are doing well. We can afford private but our kids are doing fine. I’m not sure fine is enough. Many people move here for the top schools, which is why we also moved here. I’m not sure if the extra commute and $50k per kid per year is worth it.

That’s the difference right there. I don’t think “fine” is good enough. I want the absolute best education for my kid. Sounds like you’re thinking that way too. How that works commute wise and money wise isn’t something anyone else can answer for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

We live in McLean where public schools are excellent. My kids are doing well. We can afford private but our kids are doing fine. I’m not sure fine is enough. Many people move here for the top schools, which is why we also moved here. I’m not sure if the extra commute and $50k per kid per year is worth it.

That’s the difference right there. I don’t think “fine” is good enough. I want the absolute best education for my kid. Sounds like you’re thinking that way too. How that works commute wise and money wise isn’t something anyone else can answer for you.

We can afford tuition. McLean is full of very motivated students and well educated parents. We are surrounded by families who send their kids to private. That is probably why we are second guessing our decision to keep our kids in public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

Right and if you think there aren’t parents in this area who could afford something better, but choose to keep their kids in an inferior option because they’d rather spend the money on fancy vacations and luxury cars, then you’re naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Depends on your child. If you are in the Woodacres /pile /Whitman clusters, then absolutely send your child to public.

If you’re technically in DC, then obviously a private so he or she is not drag to town by the masses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

I’m not OP, but I’ll be honest since it’s anonymous: if you can afford an excellent private school and choose to send your kids to a public school, despite knowing it has problems (and that’s not all public schools, so that’s an important caveat), then yes — I think that shows you don’t prioritize education. Prioritizing education means sending your kids to the absolute best place you can, whether that’s public or private.

We live in McLean where public schools are excellent. My kids are doing well. We can afford private but our kids are doing fine. I’m not sure fine is enough. Many people move here for the top schools, which is why we also moved here. I’m not sure if the extra commute and $50k per kid per year is worth it.

That’s the difference right there. I don’t think “fine” is good enough. I want the absolute best education for my kid. Sounds like you’re thinking that way too. How that works commute wise and money wise isn’t something anyone else can answer for you.

We are zoned for Langley and this area feels very pressure cooker to me. I do not want to send my kids to a pressure cooker private school either. The non elite private schools don’t seem any better than Langley, especially in college admissions. I know college admissions is not the end all be all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

They certainly taught delusion. Full pay at Andover/Exeter and you don't think you're wealth. You don't think there was value in admissions, but you were confident enough to only apply to two schools.

Maybe he applied EA, ED, and/or rolling admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

They certainly taught delusion. Full pay at Andover/Exeter and you don't think you're wealth. You don't think there was value in admissions, but you were confident enough to only apply to two schools.

Maybe he applied EA, ED, and/or rolling admissions.

I applied ED to both schools. In retrospect, I should have hedged more, but I was confident in my chances. The difference at my high school is the college counseling staff has a relationship with admissions officers at top schools and will advocate for kids they think are good fits. So I had the benefit of a personal call from my high school to the deans of admissions.

That happens for everyone, not just full pay kids or big donor kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

Right and if you think there aren’t parents in this area who could afford something better, but choose to keep their kids in an inferior option because they’d rather spend the money on fancy vacations and luxury cars, then you’re naive.

DH and I are from humble beginnings. We have chosen to send our kids to public because we want them to attend school with kids like us. We do live well and have a lovely home, travel and have nice cars. We can afford tuition without financial strain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

Many families that prioritize academics left public schools. So it is much easier for a smart academically minded kid to find their peeps in private. That’s part of why we go, even though financially it is very hard.

Parental inclusion? How old is DD, because after 4th it’s all drop off events and I’m not looking to make parent friends. Sure I’ll be friendly and chat when we encounter each other, but how often would that even happen

Are you saying parents don’t prioritize education if they send their kids to public?

Everyone “prioritizes” education. This is more of a show me, don’t tell me thing to tease out.

Right and if you think there aren’t parents in this area who could afford something better, but choose to keep their kids in an inferior option because they’d rather spend the money on fancy vacations and luxury cars, then you’re naive.

DH and I are from humble beginnings. We have chosen to send our kids to public because we want them to attend school with kids like us. We do live well and have a lovely home, travel and have nice cars. We can afford tuition without financial strain.

So you’re prioritizing the social aspect over quality of education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an unhooked smart kid is better off in public?

We know a family who sends their kid to St Albans and it seems like the mom has been rejected socially. It seems like a lot of trouble and money to attend an elite school to not be included. Parents are wealthy enough to full pay but not rich. Parents attended good schools but not ivy. I know they want their kids to go to an ivy or equivalent.

I went to a NE boarding school (Andover/Exeter). I’m not at all from a super wealthy family, although not on FA. I absolutely felt included and found my people. I also was SO much more engaged in school there than in my public school (and it was a strong school district in the NYC suburbs). That’s the value of that school for me, not social connections or college admissions (although I got into both colleges I applied to).

Except this was probably a while ago and the game has changed.

They certainly taught delusion. Full pay at Andover/Exeter and you don't think you're wealth. You don't think there was value in admissions, but you were confident enough to only apply to two schools.

Maybe he applied EA, ED, and/or rolling admissions.

I applied ED to both schools. In retrospect, I should have hedged more, but I was confident in my chances. The difference at my high school is the college counseling staff has a relationship with admissions officers at top schools and will advocate for kids they think are good fits. So I had the benefit of a personal call from my high school to the deans of admissions.

That happens for everyone, not just full pay kids or big donor kids.